Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: the_conscience; NYer; Salvation; Pyro7480; Coleus; narses; annalex; Campion; don-o; Mrs. Don-o; ...
But if one misconstrues the doctrine into a silly acronym then that person only begins with a false premise to try and justify a false conclusion.

So, it's fine to use words like "Romanist" and "Papist" but one can't make acronyms for 16th century inventions?

Absolutely not. I reject false premises.

If you reject false premises, sola scriptura would be the place to start. Even Martin Luther expressed grave reservations about it toward the end.

Unnecessary for what?

In post 1369 you wrote:

Not all things in the Bible are clear and need interpretation but what is necessary for salvation is clear without needing an interpreter.

So, I am simply asking about the "unnecessary" parts; the use of the word necessary typically presumes that there are also portions which are not necessary.

I'm not a remedial reading teacher. If one can't tie a sentence to it's referent they should seek a professional who can teach them to do so.

Perhaps the problem is with your comprehension and not what I wrote. Here is what you said in post 1369:

It's not all or nothing.

If a person says "it's not all or nothing," it typically means that some parts are optional.

I believe the Reformation returned the Church to it's apostolic roots.

Can you show where the Apostles taught sola scriptura? Can you explain how sola scriptura was even possible prior to the invention of the printing press?

1,379 posted on 07/21/2010 11:44:46 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1377 | View Replies ]


To: wagglebee
So, it's fine to use words like "Romanist" and "Papist" but one can't make acronyms for 16th century inventions?

Apples and Oranges. You can use whatever term you like. It doesn't offend me. The question is does the term or acronym accurately reflect the subject.

If you reject false premises, sola scriptura would be the place to start. Even Martin Luther expressed grave reservations about it toward the end.

I appreciate your concern but so far you failed to show you have any knowledge of the doctrine beyond a simplistic acronym.

So, I am simply asking about the "unnecessary" parts

Not all things written in the Bible are necessary for salvation (i.e. the OT ceremonial laws)

If a person says "it's not all or nothing," it typically means that some parts are optional.

You've still failed to find the referent for the sentence. Let me know if you find it.

Can you show where the Apostles taught sola scriptura?

Romanists are shown daily on this board where it is taught not only by the Apostles but by Christ himself. I'm sure if you search FR for "sola scriptura" you can find many articles posted that describe the doctrine accurately and give the biblical proofs.

Can you explain how sola scriptura was even possible prior to the invention of the printing press?

Sure. How did the early Church get the epistles, gospels, and Old Testament canon? Was it written in Latin? Was it chained to an altar?

1,384 posted on 07/21/2010 12:20:56 PM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1379 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson